From Audience to Evaluator: When Visibility into Prior Evaluations Leads to Convergence or Divergence in Subsequent Evaluations Among Professionals

References

• Benjamin BA, Podolny JM (1999) Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(3):563–589.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Rosenholtz SJ, Zelditch M Jr (1980) Status organizing processes. Annual Rev. Sociol. 6:479–508.Google Scholar
• Boltanski L, Thévenot L (2006) On Justification: Economies of Worth (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Botelho TL (2018) Here’s an opportunity: Knowledge sharing among competitors as a response to buy-in uncertainty. Organ. Sci. 29(6):1033–1055.Link, Google Scholar
• Botelho TL, Abraham M (2017) Pursuing quality: How search costs and uncertainty magnify gender-based double standards in a multistage evaluation process. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(4):698–730.Google Scholar
• Botelho TL, Chang M (2022) The evaluation of founder failure and success by hiring firms: A field experiment. Organ. Sci. 34(1):484–508.Google Scholar
• Bothner MS (2003) Competition and social influence: The diffusion of the sixth‐generation processor in the global computer industry. Amer. J. Sociol. 108(6):1175–1210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (1987) Social contagion and innovation: Cohesion versus structural equivalence. Amer. J. Sociol. 92(6):1287–1335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chevalier JA, Mayzlin D (2006) The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. J. Marketing. Res. 43(3):345–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen CM (1997) The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail (Harvard Business Review Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Correll SJ, Ridgeway CL (2006) Expectation states theory. Delamater J, ed. Handbook of Social Psychology, Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research (Springer, Boston).Google Scholar
• Correll SJ, Ridgeway CL, Zuckerman EW, Jank S, Jordan-Bloch S, Nakagawa S (2017) It’s the conventional thought that counts: How third-order inference produces status advantage. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 82(2):297–327.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diekmann A, Ben Jann WP, Wehrli S (2014) Reputation formation and the evolution of cooperation in anonymous online markets. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 79(1):65–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DiPrete TA, Eirich GM (2006) Cumulative advantage as a mechanism for inequality: A review of theoretical and empirical developments. Annual Rev. Sociol. 32:271–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Espeland WN, Sauder M (2007) Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. Amer. J. Sociol. 113(1):1–40.Google Scholar
• Financial Times (2013) Global MBA ranking. Financial Times, Ltd (January 28), https://rankings.ft.com/rankings/1412/global-mba-ranking-2013.Google Scholar
• Foschi M (2000) Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Rev. Sociol. 26:21–42.Google Scholar
• Galton F (1907) One vote, one value. Nature 75:414.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grofman B, Owen G, Feld SL (1983) Thirteen theorems in search of the truth. Theory Decision 15(3):261–278.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hallen BL, Pahnke EC (2016) When do entrepreneurs accurately evaluate venture capital firms’ track records? A bounded rationality perspective. Acad. Management J. 59(5):1535–1560.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hannák A, Wagner C, Garcia D, Mislove A, Strohmaier M, Wilson C (2017) Bias in online freelance marketplaces: Evidence from TaskRabbit and Fiverr. CSCW ‘17: Proc. 2017 ACM Conf. Comp. Supported Cooperative Work and Soc. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1914–1933.Google Scholar
• Hong H, Kubik JD, Solomon A (2000) Security analysts’ career concerns and herding of earnings forecasts. RAND J. Econom. 31(1):121–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kellogg KC, Valentine MA, Christin A (2020) Algorithms at work: The new contested terrain of control. Acad. Management Ann. 14(1):366–410.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim JW, King BG (2014) Seeing stars: Matthew effects and status bias in major league baseball umpiring. Management Sci. 60(11):2619–2644.Link, Google Scholar
• Li D (2017) Expertise versus bias in evaluation: Evidence from the NIH. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 9(2):60–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luca M (2016) Reviews, reputation, and revenue: The case of Yelp. Com. Harvard Business School NOM Unit Working Paper No. 12-016, Harvard Business School, Boston, 1–39.Google Scholar
• Marsden PV, Friedkin NE (1993) Network studies of social influence. Sociol. Methods Res. 22(1):127–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1948) The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Rev. 8(2):193–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science. Science 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Muchnik L, Aral S, Taylor SJ (2013) Social influence bias: A randomized experiment. Science 341(6146):647–651.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olson DM, Waguespack DM (2020) Strategic behavior by market intermediaries. Strategic Management J. 41(13):2474–2492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pager D, Bonikowski B, Western B (2009) Discrimination in a low-wage labor market: A field experiment. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 74(5):777–799.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2001) Networks as the pipes and prisms of the market. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(1):33–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Podolny JM (2005) Status Signals: A Sociological Study of Market Competition (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Salganik MJ, Dodds PS, Watts DJ (2006) Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311(5762):854–856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (Routledge, New York).Google Scholar
• Sharkey A, Kovács B, Hsu G (2023) Expert critics, rankings, and review aggregators: The changing nature of intermediation and the rise of markets with multiple intermediaries. Acad. Management J. Ann. 17(1).Google Scholar
• Strang D, Macy MW (2001) In search of excellence: Fads, success stories, and adaptive emulation. Amer. J. Sociol. 107(1):147–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Strang D, Soule SA (1998) Diffusion in organizations and social movements: From hybrid corn to poison pills. Annual Rev. Sociol. 24(1):265–290.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Surowiecki J (2005) The Wisdom Of Crowds (Anchor Books, New York).Google Scholar
• U.S. News and World Report (2013) National university rankings. Report, U.S. News and World Report, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Vallas S, Schor JB (2020) What do platforms do? Understanding the gig economy. Annual Rev. Sociol. 46(1):273–294.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Veblen T (1899) The Theory of the Leisure Class (Dover Publications, New York).Google Scholar
• Wang RD, Shaver JM (2016) The multifaceted nature of competitive response: Repositioning and new product launch as joint response to competition. Strategy Sci. 1(3):148–162.Google Scholar
• White HC (2002) Markets from Networks: Socioeconomic Models of Production (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Wright G (2015) Employee feedback apps on the rise. SHRM (September 14), https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/technology/pages/employee-feedback-apps.aspx.Google Scholar
• Zuckerman EW (2012) Construction, concentration, and (dis)continuities in social valuations. Annual Rev. Sociol. 38(1):223–245.Crossref, Google Scholar